Pz III M

[ThorHa]

Just finished dlc 43 Prokhorovka on Gen. with a DV rurn 22. and I have to say I am pretty impressed with my 3 Pz III M that all participated. Granted they have some attack or ini heroes attached, were strength 13 initially and are all 4 star plus experienced, but they have the least amount of losses from all my armour although they each battled with T34/43, KV 1 C and other Russian heavies at nearly full strength. If I am bored some day I will replay P. With only Pz III and IV. Which would be pretty historical by the way - in the real tactical battle around Prokhorovka there were just 6 Tigers and no Panther present. The Red Army lost the actual väbattle big time nevertheless (on a strategic level it was a clear loss for the Germans).

And my congratulations to the designer of this scenario, although I imagine him to have a sadist streak. I really had my little shock with all the strength 13 and 14 Soviet armour suddenly approaching from the north as I just reached Prokhorovskas outskirts. Would I not have been a cautious player converging with all battle groups on P. at the same time, I am sure there would have been some core losses.

But bottom line is - Pz III and IV are more than valid battle machines in 1943 still. This might change in dlc 1944.

Regards,
Thorsten

[captainjack]

Well done for managing a DV with Panzer IIIs.

A short while ago I tried to get a DV on Prokhorovka and lost so many experienced units to the counter attack I had to go back to AK to unwind and rethink my playing style.

A few days ago on another run through 43 East I opted for MV at Prokhorovka and after taking sufficient victory hexes I set up a defensive cordon to ensure I could pull back damaged units out of harm's way. It worked OK, and the counter attack force ended up almost completely destroyed as it hit my defences a bit at a time, rather than swamping my advanced units like last time. Maybe another two or three turns and I could have tried for the DV.

While the Tiger's did help, the main credit must go to the four 4* Elefants which could damage any armour and took out some of the T34/43 in a single attack. They have also been very effective against IS1, KV85 and the assault guns later in 43 East, which means that the tanks (still all Tigers for me) can then mop up the 2 to 5 strength units. However, I could see Panzer III or IV doing that job well and more cheaply than the Tigers.

Incidentally, while the historic German forces were quite low on Tigers and Elefants, I though that most of the Soviet forces were still mostly T26, early T34 and BTs, which was why they were so concerned to attack at speed to close to effective range for their own guns before the 88s could destroy them. Fighting historic attacks with a reasonably historic core would be tough enough, but fighting a high-end Soviet massed attack with a historic core would be beyond me at the moment.

[ThorHa]

Something is odd here. My 3 Panzer III have heroes with +3 for the first one, +5 for the second and "Multi" for the third, the special hero at it has a low boost for everything.

What I observed was even surprising for myself - even T34/43 strength 13 did not attack the encountered III M, which were my forward screen at the moment of counterattack. Not one single attack, if I remember correctly not even on the one lacking artillery cover.

Same for my 3 Pz IV H - they are left alone. The only attacks on tanks initiated by the AI ever were near Prokhorovka on a low experience Tiger I (2 stars) at strength 10 by a KV 1c, followed by 152 Arty, followed by a T34/43. Tiger easily survived with 6 strength left.

Therefore I am convinced Prokhorovka can be done with Pz III and IV alone. Oboyan would be even harder though, I regard that scenario as more difficult than Yakovlevo and Prokhorovka.

Regards,
Thorsten

[ThorHa]

Regardjng the historical battle I recommend to start here:
http://www.uni.edu/~licari/citadel.htm

There are far too many myths around a tactical fight which neither was decisive nor defining for the last German major attack on the East Front. It was not even the biggest tank battle of WW II.

Regards,
Thorsten

[Forefall]

Experience and heroes make a massive difference to the difficulty of a scenario.

[ThorHa]

No doubt, given the stats boost by these. It just demonstrates that with a pre build core the all Tiger/Panther/Fw190/ Elephant approach is not necessary. My active core for the Kursk scenarios still had 3 active and successful Me109 F and G (which avoid to attack the rare Yak 9 or Yak 3 at full strength of course), 3 "minor" AT (2 Marder IIIM, 1 StuG 3 G), no more than 5 Tigers and 2 Panthers, a lot of high experience infantry, still 2 StuG III B (no better replacement yet) and a variation of no less than 8 KV 1c, Pz III M and Pz IVH, none of them emplyed to avoid combat.

But I freely admit one thing - most scenarios in 1943 felt like work . No more freely roaming battle groups and freely strafing aircraft, I got rid of the Soviet air force by using the sighting rules of the PC engine and extremely careful fighter positioning each turn.

Regards,
Thorsten

[Resolute]

Those units with the hero bonuses you mentioned are no longer Pz IIIM since they inherit completely different stats. A Panther with a high def. hero will always be better as a Tiger 1 in late game but without that hero bonus it will start takeing a lot of damage as soon as IS-2s show up.

[iceFlame]

Regardjng the historical battle I recommend to start here:
http://www.uni.edu/~licari/citadel.htm

There are far too many myths around a tactical fight which neither was decisive nor defining for the last German major attack on the East Front. It was not even the biggest tank battle of WW II.

Regards,
Thorsten

It's an interesting read, but the author's training is in political science and I'm unable to find any evidence that he's qualified as a historian.

[ThorHa]

As a project manager - raw data often speaks for itself:

http://www.vy75.dial.pipex.com/data.htm

Regards,
Thorsten

[ThorHa]

@Resolute:

Without underestimating the influence of heroes, a plus 3 attack hero does not make a Pz III M a Tiger, not even a Pz IV H. My conclusion after too much caution caused by the partly discouraging reports of the open beta and after absorbing the very clever scripting of the PC map designers is simple - experience is the real key just like it was in PG. A 4 or 5 star unit even with only partial overstrength is really another beast than a 1 or 2 star unit, which was exactly the case for PG as well. Heroes are nice and especially for infantry deliver stats boosts out of proportion for the initial stats, but are hardly the main driver for tanks or AA.

As a side observation - I doubt the value of too much overstrength meanwhile (and this is DIFFERENT to PG). It is nearly impossible to preserve overstrength especially on front line tanks due to enemy fighters nibbling away one or two points on each attack. And it is impossible to prevent that without risking even more damage to experienced fighters due to towed enemy AA. As a result for 1943 overstrength exceeding 12 or max. 13 is no longer cost effective except for artillery.

Regards,
Thorsten

[Resolute]

It has really more to do about the way the AI chooses its target. Any tank/AT unit with less defense then 20 runs into trouble in the late GC because the AI will just attack those. The same goes for a good (+3) attack hero bonus to some extent, i.e less likely being attacked.

And regarding overstrengthing units you're right, especially the strafing fighters are a real pita. I usually get my front line unit to 11 strength even it makes surrenders a lot harder since you need more suppression from art units.